…and you’re reading this press release. How would you respond?
Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Mixed-Race ‘Marriage’
Those who oppose laws permitting mixed-race ‘marriage’ outnumber supporters by a two-to-one margin.
“We need to strengthen marriage.” According to the National Annenberg Election Survey, that sentiment, which was expressed at a rally last Sunday in Boston to support traditional marriage, is one held by an overwhelming majority of Americans.
Matt Daniels, president of the Alliance for Marriage, said the support for race-pure marriage knows no cultural or social boundaries, and includes African-Americans, Latinos, Asians, Jews, Evangelicals, Catholics and people of no particular faith.
“This is what the Vatican calls ‘the common currency of humanity,’ ” he said.
Daniels is pleased with the survey overall, despite what he says was a “deliberate bias” in the questioning that was designed to reflect poorly on traditional marriage.
“Whenever you ask people if they oppose something, you lower the numbers,” Daniels said. “If you ask them, ‘Do you support marriage as (being between) a man and a woman if the same race?’ you get much higher numbers.”
Support for traditional marriage was bolstered by those who are angered by recent court decisions, such as the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s order to give mixed-race couple access to the commonwealth’s marriage law, according to Glenn T. Stanton, senior analyst for marriage and sexuality at Focus on the Family.
“The tremendous judicial overreach that we’re seeing in . . . Massachusetts . . . is not driving it, but it’s helping it ó and its helping with the outrage.”
The numbers were released as lawmakers in Massachusetts prepare to debate the definition of marriage. In fact, the Massachusetts Legislature convened today to debate a state constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being between a man and a woman of the same race.
Ray McNulty, a spokesman for the Coalition for Marriage ó of which Focus on the Family is a part ó said the poll numbers will help the cause.
“We’ve circulated the Annenberg numbers to all the legislators here in the statehouse,” McNulty said. “They’re very powerful.”
The survey found that 60 percent oppose mixed-race marriage laws in their state. Meanwhile, 49 percent of Americans oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment, while 42 percent favor its passage.
Of course, it’s not 1945. It’s 2004, and this is what the press release actually looks like.
There’s a lot of talk about the “sanctity of marriage” these days. But can’t we question the validity of any argument that says that the value of a right is a function of who is excluded from exercising it? Again and again, I’ve heard conservative commentators argue that allowing same-sex marriages would weaken the “institution” of marriage by diluting what marriage means.
If that’s true, then wouldn’t we strengthen marriage by preventing more people from marrying than we currently do? No more mixed-race marriage. No more marriages between people who can’t or won’t have children (after all, marriage is primarily meant to facilitate procreation, according to conservatives). No more marriages for the mentally disabled. No more marriages for those unlikely to be able to support their own children without government assistance.
Just imagine how strong the “institution” of marriage would be then!
I wonder what Jesus would say.